WATCH LIVE: Deputy press secretary Raj Shah holds White House briefing
February 22, 2018, 1:19 PM ET
Saudi's energy ministry said the country's output would drop to 9 million barrels per day (bpd) in July from around 10 million bpd in May, the biggest reduction in years.
"This is a Saudi lollipop," Saudi Energy Minister Prince Abdulaziz told a news conference. "We wanted to ice the cake. We always want to add suspense. We don't want people to try to predict what we do... This market needs stabilisation".
OPEC+, which groups the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and allies led by Russia, pumps around 40% of the world's crude, meaning its policy decisions can have a major impact on oil prices.
A surprise decision to cut supply in April briefly sent international benchmark Brent crude around $9 higher, but prices have since retreated under pressure from concerns about the weakness of the global economy and its impact on demand.
On Friday, Brent ended trade for the week at $76.
Saudi Arabia is the only member of OPEC+ with sufficient spare capacity and storage to be able to easily reduce and increase output.
It was able to respond rapidly to excess supply that weakened the market in the early stages of the pandemic in 2020 when the group of producers implemented record output cuts.
EXTENSION TO END OF 2024
OPEC+ has in place cuts of 3.66 million bpd, amounting to 3.6% of global demand, including 2 million bpd agreed last year and voluntary cuts of 1.66 million bpd agreed in April.
Those cuts were valid until the end of 2023 and on Sunday OPEC+, in a broader deal on output policy agreed after seven hours of talks, said it would extend them until the end of 2024.
Since Russia's invasion of Ukraine began in February last year, Western nations have accused OPEC of manipulating oil prices and undermining the global economy through high energy costs. The West has also accused OPEC of siding with Russia.
In response, OPEC insiders have said the West's money-printing over the last decade has driven inflation and forced oil-producing nations to act to maintain the value of their main export.
Analysts said Sunday's OPEC+ decision sent a clear signal the group was willing to support prices and attempt to thwart speculators.
"It is a clear signal to the market that OPEC+ is willing to put and defend a price floor," Amrita Sen, co-founder of Energy Aspects think-tank, said.
Veteran OPEC watcher and founder of Black Gold Investors Gary Ross said: "The Saudis have made good on their threats to speculators and they clearly want higher oil prices."
As the market stayed closed on Sunday, UBS analyst Giovanni Staunovo predicted a strong start when it reopens on Monday.
In addition to extending the existing OPEC+ cuts of 3.66 million bpd, the group also agreed on Sunday to reduce overall production targets from January 2024 by a further 1.4 million bpd versus current targets to a combined of 40.46 million bpd.
However, many of these reductions will not be real as the group lowered the targets for Russia, Nigeria and Angola to bring them into line with actual current production levels.
By contrast, the United Arab Emirates was allowed to raise output targets by around 0.2 million bpd to 3.22 million bpd.
(Reporting by Ahmad Ghaddar, Alex Lawler, Maha El Dahan and Julia Payne; Writing by Dmitry Zhdannikov; Editing by David Holmes and Barbara Lewis)
Over the weekend, the New York Times broke a story that former Donald Trump lawyer Evan Corcoran had recordings that the Justice Department now has.
As a lawyer, Corcoran and Trump enjoyed the attorney-client privilege, but it became clear that Trump used Corcoran while secretly withholding information about the documents he was hiding. A federal court ruled that the crim-fraud exception could be used to breach the attorney-client privilege.
"The level of detail in the recording is said to have angered and unnerved close aides to Mr. Trump, who are worried it contains direct quotes from sensitive conversations," the Times reported.
Former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance, who now teaches at the University of Alabama School of Law, helped write a 186-page prosecution memo that provides some framework for what the Justice Department might use in making charging decisions. It's a guide for non-lawyers to understand how such an indictment might look when/if the DOJ makes its move.
"Under the federal principles of prosecution, first you have to answer the question, could you indict?" Vance explained to MSNBC host Ayman Mohyeldin. "That means, do you have sufficient evidence to obtain a conviction? So, we considered two buckets of charges. We consider charges that are related to illegally retaining these documents, that's the Espionage Act, a retention provision, theft of government property. But we also considered — because of his flagrant conduct — Trump's obstruction of justice."
She explained that they also looked at charges involving obstruction. There are several ongoing examples of that.
"The evidence, if the public record is correct, is a solid evidence, prosecutors should be able to obtain and sustain a conviction. That answers the question, can you indict?" Vance asked. "Then you have to answer the more nuanced question of should you? A big part of that is whether or not an indictment would be consistent with how similar situations have been handled in the past. In this instance, indicting Trump based on his conduct would be very consistent with how other cases involving retention but not dissemination of classified or other sensitive material has been handled."
Vance went on to say that the weapon that the federal government has that reporters don't is the subpoena power to force people to testify before a grand jury.
"Typically, the government knows a lot more than the public does when a case is indicted. This is a little bit different because the reporting has been so outstanding. Many reporters are very well-sourced," said Vance. "But it would be surprising if there weren't a few surprises it would that could be good or bad for prosecutors. It's possible that there could be some form of exculpatory evidence that suggests Trump is not guilty, maybe of any charges, or at least some of them. But It's also possible that the government's evidence gets much stronger when they access information through the grand jury. They may even be able to prove, for instance, that Trump disseminated these materials instead of just retaining them. And we will have to wait until we see the indictment to know how that shakes out."
See the comments from Vance in the video below or at the link here.
Former US Attorney predicts possible 'surprises' that could come up in a Trump indictment youtu.be
Snowden showed no one was safe from electronic prying by the National Security Agency, least of all Americans, whose private communications were supposedly constitutionally protected.
Ten years later, Snowden sits in exile in Moscow and US intelligence still collects huge amounts of private electronically stored and transmitted information.
But his revelations had lasting impact, advancing privacy protections in Europe and America and accelerating use of encryption.
After Snowden's leaks, "in almost every Western democracy, there was a historic debate about the relationship of citizens and the state mass surveillance programs, whether oversight of those programs was adequate," said Ben Wizner of the American Civil Liberties Union and an attorney for Snowden.
A boyish 29-year-old NSA systems administrator, Snowden downloaded thousands of NSA and CIA documents showing the extent of the global data collection dragnet that took off after the September 11, 2001 attacks.
Documents that Snowden gave to journalists in secret Hong Kong meetings showed how US intelligence worked with Britain's GCHQ and other agencies to build files on billions of people without any grounds for suspicion.
They showed the US was able to tap into the phones of allied leaders and that the NSA had a program called Prism that collected user data from internet giants like Google and Facebook -- with and without their agreement.
The NSA collected call data from leading cell provider Verizon and routinely trawled data from public companies, hospitals and universities.
He also revealed that GCHQ with NSA help sucked up all traffic moving through major global undersea communications cables.
GCHQ also surreptitiously snapped millions of pictures from the computer cameras of people while they were on Yahoo webcam chats.
The problem, Snowden said, was not the justification of fighting terrorism, but that these were secret programs with virtually no limits.
"The public needs to decide whether these kinds of programs and policies are right or wrong," he said.
The revelations outraged the public but also US intelligence, who accused Snowden of devastating counter-terrorism programs and helping America's enemies.
US spy agencies however declined to enumerate the damage, only noting that their surveillance had prevented dozens of attacks.
In 2016, national intelligence director James Clapper pointed to the central damage: Snowden made the NSA's work harder by pushing internet and mobile communications firms, app makers and others to encrypt their services.
For Wizner, the leaks strengthened civil liberties, even if more internet companies than ever are collecting users' data.
Snowden effectively forced the White House, Congress and courts to reverse course on spying activities they had approved in secret, revising authorities for the NSA and forcing some programs to be cancelled.
"Congress, for the first time since the 1970s, legislated to reduce rather than expand the surveillance authorities," Wizner said.
In 2018 the European Union implemented the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) aiming at the power of US companies like Google and Facebook to collect and make liberal use of user data.
"Snowden's global surveillance revelations tangibly affected the Internet privacy debate in Europe," wrote Gus Rossi, director for Responsible Technology and the Omidyar Group.
Under the GDPR, last month Facebook owner Meta was fined 1.2 billion euros ($1.3 billion) by Ireland for violating EU data protections because data it collects on European users and transfers to the US was not safe from the NSA and CIA.
Now 39, Snowden still advocates for more privacy protections. Living in Moscow with his American wife and two sons, both born in Russia, he earns a living with paid speeches and consultations.
He cannot leave Russia for lack of another safe haven, and is wanted by the US on felony charges under the Espionage Act.
"He would prefer to be elsewhere. And we both wished that there were an option other than a maximum security prison cell and living in Russia," said Wizner.
Marcy Wheeler, an independent journalist focused on the nexus of intelligence and the law, is more skeptical about the gains of Snowden's revelations.
The ever-adaptive NSA just accomplishes what it needs "via other means," she said.
"The most important surveillance targeting Americans... is done by the FBI and, with even less oversight, by states and localities," she said.
Copyright © 2023 Raw Story Media, Inc. PO Box 21050, Washington, D.C. 20009 | Masthead | Privacy Policy | Manage Preferences
For corrections contact corrections@rawstory.com, for support contact support@rawstory.com.